![]() Pretty sure that is what the plugin does currently, you can test by uploading your example and placing the full sized image. Yea that is the main goal of this work in the first place, so if you place a full size image on your site and the jpeg is smaller than the webp we should serve the jpeg for that size. It makes sense to me and would provide the site visitor with the quickest possible result. Apache) but it would be hard/impossible for core to implement given the variety of stacks that run WordPress. A plugin might support some use cases (eg. I don't think we can do this type of request based response directly because WordPress doesn't handle image requests - those are handled by the we web server. Imagify’s solution (which delivers an appropriate file on requesting a JPG, according to browser support) would be especially luxurious. It has all of the sizes that WordPress creates by default, at WP’s default JPEG quality, with a suggested WebP closest quality, and percentage of file-size saved for each of the tested images.Īs mentioned in the last update, I think it still needs at least a line art example to be a bit more definitive, but I like where the report ended up.Ī note that it takes a long time (hours) to run this particular one, but it’s totally doable to re-run with the images we want / need. The last tab (“Quality Settings for JPEG 83”) is the most helpful, I think. I made the changes mentioned above with changing the sizes generated to WP's defaults, and range to (incrementing by 1s). I’m pretty excited about this particular revision. I’m not sure if it’d be better for me just to cherry pick the commits at this point (and what repo it'll eventually live in), but that way it’s a bit more clear what’s going on, if anyone would like to take a look. I ported the changes in the branches into a clean branch so that I could make a PR, to bring back to main on my repo: So if there's something better out there (a little looking found SSIMULACRA, for instance, although that looks to be a couple years old), we can run the script against that as well. I've looked at a few image sample sets, but I'm not sure which is most appropriate at this stage.Īt the very least, I think we're missing a sample image line art / text.Īny recommendations on sample sets and / or single additional high resolution images would be great.Īs a last note, right now this uses DSSIM, but it's pretty straight-forward to swap that out for any other image comparison tool. Reducing the range (right now, testing if 70-100 can still run) so that the amount of images generated isn't a problemĪfter that, I think we still should test with some additional images, so picking appropriate ones would be a good idea.Changing quality testing to 1s (right now, it tests by 10s or 5s, from quality 10-100), so we can test specifically with the 82, the current JPEG quality setting.Changing the sizes generated to match the default WordPress sizes.Here are a couple example reports generated by the script, both with DSSIM 3.1.2:Įxtended Test Quality Range (quality by 5s), with Imagick Only. env to set up to run on environments other than WordPress' Docker development environment. There's documentation there now, and it should be possible to use. I've been making good progress here, and about ready to move the branch changes into main on my fork: On Imagick, initial results show the current default is close, anyway, but that different types of images change the optimal level, so a larger sample set of images would be helpful. ![]() I’m hoping running it on GD, along with expanding the image set, will help verify those results. If you download that branch, and toss it in any sort of local server, you can view the results from the initial dataset by visiting index.html. As far as I'm aware, this was added back when WebP support was added to WordPress. Ran into a problem where GD in the WordPress Docker Environment doesn’t seem to support WebP on the default PHP, at least on my installation, so digging into that. I’m currently trying to get it to work with GD as well. It's a very rough proof of concept at the moment. I got some initial results in this branch with Imagick before a break - enough to find out that the method should work for us: Since you mentioned srcset, just in case the info is helpful: WordPress supports srcset natively, and the sizes should be automatically filled out with a set of thumbnails/generated sizes that are created on upload. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |